Monday October 22, 2018
Home Politics UN Chief Ban ...

UN Chief Ban Ki-moon Fears Genocide about to Start in South Sudan unless immediate Action is taken regarding Arms Prohibition

Political rivalry between South Sudan President Salva Kiir, an ethnic Dinka, and his former deputy Riek Machar, a Nuer, led to civil war in 2013 that has often followed ethnic lines

0
//
90
Refugee Kids
Refugee Kids: Children, who fled fighting in South Sudan, stand inside a tented classroom at the Bidi Bidi refugee resettlement camp near the border with South Sudan, in northern Uganda, Dec. 7, 2016. VOA
Republish
Reprint

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Monday he feared genocide was about to start in South Sudan unless immediate action is taken, renewing his plea for the Security Council to impose an arms embargo on the world’s newest country.

NewsGram brings to you current foreign news from all over the world.

“If we fail to act, South Sudan will be on a trajectory towards mass atrocities,” Ban told the 15-member Security Council. “The Security Council must take steps to stem the flow of arms to South Sudan.”

Noting that his special adviser on the prevention of genocide, Adama Dieng, has described genocide as a process, Ban said: “I am afraid that process is about to begin unless immediate action is taken.”

Political rivalry between South Sudan President Salva Kiir, an ethnic Dinka, and his former deputy Riek Machar, a Nuer, led to civil war in 2013 that has often followed ethnic lines. The pair signed a shaky peace deal last year, but fighting has continued. Machar fled in July and is now in South Africa.

Ban said reports suggested Kiir and his loyalists “are contemplating a new military offensive in the coming days” against Machar-allied opposition troops, while “there are clear indications that Riek Machar and other opposition groups are pursuing a military escalation.”

Dieng told the council last month that he had seen “all the signs that ethnic hatred and targeting of civilians could evolve into genocide,” and the head of a U.N. human rights commission said the country was on the brink of an all-out ethnic civil war.

“How many more clues do you, do we all need to move from our anxious words to real preventative action?” U.N. aid chief Stephen O’Brien asked the council on Monday.

U.S. PRESSES TO “STOP ATROCITIES”

South Sudan’s U.N. ambassador, Akuei Bona Malwal, on Monday said the descriptions were exaggerated and did not “reflect the reality on the ground.”

“There have been no attempts, that we are aware of, on the part of the South Sudanese masses to turn against each other,” he told the Security Council.

Following an outbreak of deadly violence in Juba, the capital, in July, the Security Council in August authorized a 4,000-strong protection force as part of a U.N. peacekeeping force already on the ground and threatened an arms embargo if Kiir’s government did not cooperate. None of the new troops have yet deployed.

“Obstruction and defiance,” the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, said of Kiir’s government.

NewsGram brings to you top news around the world today.

U.N. peacekeepers have been in South Sudan since it gained independence from Sudan in 2011. There are currently some 13,700 U.N. troops and police on the ground.

The United States has been struggling to secure the minimum number of votes needed for the Security Council to impose an arms embargo on South Sudan. To be adopted, a resolution needs nine votes in favor and no vetoes.

Diplomats have said that so far only seven members were in favor, with the remaining eight planning to abstain or vote no.

While veto powers Russia and China are skeptical whether an arms embargo would achieve much in a country awash with weapons, diplomats did not expect them to block the measure.

Power said she wants to put a resolution to impose an arms embargo on South Sudan to a vote before the end of the year.

Check out NewsGram for latest international news updates.

“The situation is not getting better, it’s getting worse, and we’re sitting on our hands as a council,” Power said. “We have to try to stop atrocities in South Sudan.” (VOA)

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 NewsGram

Next Story

USA: Everything you want to know about Security Clearance; Find out here!

A security clearance allows a person access to classified national security information or restricted areas.

0
Former CIA Director John O. Brennan speaks at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, March 11, 2014. President Donald Trump revoked Brennan's security clearance Wednesday. VOA
Former CIA Director John O. Brennan speaks at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, March 11, 2014. President Donald Trump revoked Brennan's security clearance Wednesday. VOA

U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday revoked the security clearance of former CIA Director John Brennan. We take a look at what that means.

What is a security clearance?

A security clearance allows a person access to classified national security information or restricted areas after completion of a background check. The clearance by itself does not guarantee unlimited access. The agency seeking the clearance must determine what specific area of information the person needs to access.

What are the different levels of security clearance?

There are three levels: Confidential, secret and top secret. Security clearances don’t expire. But, top secret clearances are reinvestigated every five years, secret clearances every 10 years and confidential clearances every 15 years.

All federal agencies follow a list of 13 potential justifications for revoking or denying a clearance. VOA
All federal agencies follow a list of 13 potential justifications for revoking or denying a clearance. VOA

Who has security clearances?

According to a Government Accountability Office report released last year, about 4.2 million people had a security clearance as of 2015, they included military personnel, civil servants, and government contractors.

Why does one need a security clearance in retirement?

Retired senior intelligence officials and military officers need their security clearances in case they are called to consult on sensitive issues.

Also Read: Governments Across The World Request Apple for 30,000 Device Information

Can the president revoke a security clearance?

Apparently. But there is no precedent for a president revoking someone’s security clearance. A security clearance is usually revoked by the agency that sought it for an employee or contractor. All federal agencies follow a list of 13 potential justifications for revoking or denying a clearance, which can include criminal acts, lack of allegiance to the United States, behavior or situation that could compromise an individual and security violations. (VOA)